Note: Complete or part of old conversation copied from the archives and brought back to you by admin. New replies can be added if desired.

Thread starter: "Mark"

I spoke with a cam grinding company about camshafts for MEL's. He said he didn't know of anyone making new cams for MEL's, but he did say the cam core makers would cast a minimum order of 100 cam cores. He said if he had 50 orders to cover half the investment he would move forward with the MEL cams. The price on each core is about 65 or so and a finished cam is about 150--without lifters. The lifters would cost about 40 or so, he said the lifters are cheap because they are the same as an FE lifter.
I know I would like a more up to date camshaft design when I rebuild my 430. I would order a couple cam shafts and maybe some cores--so that would lower the amount of people that we need to make this happen.

I had sent out e-mails to a bunch of cam companies and most responded back with "it is not availible" or "you need to place an order of atleast 500 cams---and it is very expensive". This guy had the lowest minimum order and when I spoke with him on the phone I found out that he used to be an L-M tech back in the mid to late 60's. He owns several old Ford products. He said he has thought about doing something about the MEL cams, but wasn't sure if there was enough interest to support the investment.
The way I see it is even if his lobe designs aren't right up to date, a cam design from the 90's or even the 80's would be better than from the 50's to mid 60's. Besides, he can grind whatever duration and lobe sep you want. I think there would be very few people interested in making a full race motor with big lumpy cams, but I know I would be interested in having more street pep and better overall torque of an RV style cam.
Take a look at their website, I think they would be the best people to take on this project.

Good Points. "The way I see it is even if his lobe designs aren't right up to date, a cam design from the 90's or even the 80's would be better than from the 50's to mid 60's. Besides, he can grind whatever duration and lobe sep you want. I think there would be very few people interested in making a full race motor with big lumpy cams, but I know I would be interested in having more street pep and better overall torque of an RV style cam.

Take a look at their website, I think they would be the best people to take on this project."

Ok...You convinced me. It would be better with a small company anyways as they will most likely show more appreciation for small orders.

There is a problem with the early MEL (1958) as there were several valvetrain failures and upgrades. I know of one gentleman that had a major cam grinder (an origional supplier) grind him a cam fairly recently and the grinder needed to know when the block/heads were cast as to determine what changes MEL had performed on it. I am still seeking this information (in the form of factory TSB's).

And you are correct. I doubt that anyone is going to want a full race cam, just something to give it a little more pull and thumpity-thump.

I am sure there will be several people on the LCOC board that will be interested.

I would also like to start a knowledge base of interchangeable parts (FE) and parts suppliers that we can all share.

A sign up campaign would be good, I know that I would absolutley hate to install a stock camshaft, or any cam that I didn't think was best suited to my application. Even if we all don't need a cam right at the moment, it would still be worth it to purchase a core or two---and in my case 4 or more. I have not seen an MEL in person yet, but looking at the pics, the size of the ports look like they could have a lot more potential than a stock cam.
Has anyone done any flow testing to see the intake to exhaust flow ratio? Like most Fords, I would anticipate that these engines can benefit from a little more exhaust duration, which would call for a dual pattern camshaft.
Another thought on the subject is even though most people with Lincolns and big Mercs wouldn't want a rumpity-rump camshaft, I think that the MEL would make a very interesting engine to install in a T-bucket---(a lot better choice than a Chevy 350 I might add). I think these people would want a lopey cam, which would make it good to have some blank cam cores ready to go.

I Think The Whole Problem Is FORD MOTOR COMANY followed the AMA directive in 1957 and backed out of car racing and high performance in general. 1958 was a bleak year for FORD even with the introduction of the FE and MEL. MERCURY was late in introducing the SUPER MARAUDER package and with the materials I have studied was not offered with any type of stepped up camshaft.

The early MERC 430 carried large port/valve heads, that were subsequently downsized after 1958.

HOLMAN-MOODY carried FORD through 1959 with the 430 BIRD (NASCAR) and when FORD returned to racing in 1960, focused it's energy/money on the 352/360HP and STARLINER body. The MEL was relegated to hauling heavy LINCS/MERCS down the highways.

There was many aftermarket pieces released for the MEL, but was forgotten after the mid-sixties.

And yes, I think there would be a lot of interest in these powerplants in street rods and such. Just look how many people this board is drawing out of the woodwork wanting to know more. When I first started studying MEL, there was very little info out there.

If you talk to Comp Cams, they'll tell you a completely different philosophy about how they see it on dual pattern cams. Same thing w. Racer Brown. They don’t manufacture dual patterns because they see no real advantage over the single pattern cams. The Comp man told me that the exhaust is already forced by the ex. stroke of the piston and don't need no further aid. It sounds simple but O.K to me. I couldn’t experience a real world performance difference between these two patterns myself; and I usually don’t dyno except on my desk top.
I think you’re right regarding the RV type cam. I personally would go for s.th. like appx.
270 ° dur. 210° @ 0.50” 0.50” Lift and 110° LSA either ways dual or single.
This one would be O.K too IMO
260 200 0.460 112
Just my 2 cents.